| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CABVgOSkksFz62F4fGeCd8hO_hHPDaQ5AB=VRo9tSWVdrE=nPow@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2021 14:33:12 +0800
From: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
To: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
Cc: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kunit: make kunit_tool accept optional path to
.kunitconfig fragment
On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 8:17 AM Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Currently running tests via KUnit tool means tweaking a .kunitconfig
> file, which you'd keep around locally and never commit.
> This changes makes it so users can pass in a path to a kunitconfig.
>
> One of the imagined use cases is having kunitconfig fragments in-tree
> to formalize interesting sets of tests for features/subsystems, e.g.
> $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run fs/ext4/kunitconfig
>
> For now, this hypothetical fs/ext4/kunitconfig would contain
> CONFIG_KUNIT=y
> CONFIG_EXT4_FS=y
> CONFIG_EXT4_KUNIT_TESTS=y
>
> At the moment, it's not hard to manually whip up this file, but as more
> and more tests get added, this will get tedious.
>
> It also opens the door to documenting how to run all the tests relevant
> to a specific subsystem or feature as a simple one-liner.
>
> This can be seen as an analogue to tools/testing/selftests/*/config
> But in the case of KUnit, the tests live in the same directory as the
> code-under-test, so it feels more natural to allow the kunitconfig
> fragments to live anywhere. (Though, people could create a separate
> directory if wanted; this patch imposes no restrictions on the path).
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
> ---
Really glad this is finally happening. I tried it out, and it seemed
to work pretty well.
I was wondering whether a positional argument like this was best, or
whether it'd be better to have an explicitly named argument
(--kunitconfig=path). Thinking about it though, I'm quite happy with
having this as-is: the only real other contender for a coveted
positional argument spot would've been the name of a test or test
suite (e.g., kunit.py run ext4_inode_test), and that's not really
possible with the kunit_tool architecture as-is.
One other comment below (should this work for kunit.py config?),
otherwise it looks good.
-- David
> tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py | 9 ++++++---
> tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py | 12 ++++++++----
> tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py
> index e808a47c839b..3204a23bd16e 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py
> +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py
> @@ -188,6 +188,9 @@ def add_build_opts(parser) -> None:
> help='As in the make command, "Specifies the number of '
> 'jobs (commands) to run simultaneously."',
> type=int, default=8, metavar='jobs')
> + parser.add_argument('kunitconfig',
> + help='Path to Kconfig fragment that enables KUnit tests',
> + type=str, nargs='?', metavar='kunitconfig')
>
Should this maybe be in add_common_opts()? I'd assume that we want
kunit.py config to accept this custom kunitconfig path as well.
> def add_exec_opts(parser) -> None:
> parser.add_argument('--timeout',
> @@ -256,7 +259,7 @@ def main(argv, linux=None):
> os.mkdir(cli_args.build_dir)
>
> if not linux:
> - linux = kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree(cli_args.build_dir)
> + linux = kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree(cli_args.build_dir, kunitconfig_path=cli_args.kunitconfig)
>
> request = KunitRequest(cli_args.raw_output,
> cli_args.timeout,
> @@ -274,7 +277,7 @@ def main(argv, linux=None):
> os.mkdir(cli_args.build_dir)
>
> if not linux:
> - linux = kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree(cli_args.build_dir)
> + linux = kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree(cli_args.build_dir, kunitconfig_path=cli_args.kunitconfig)
>
> request = KunitConfigRequest(cli_args.build_dir,
> cli_args.make_options)
> @@ -286,7 +289,7 @@ def main(argv, linux=None):
> sys.exit(1)
> elif cli_args.subcommand == 'build':
> if not linux:
> - linux = kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree(cli_args.build_dir)
> + linux = kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree(cli_args.build_dir, kunitconfig_path=cli_args.kunitconfig)
>
> request = KunitBuildRequest(cli_args.jobs,
> cli_args.build_dir,
> diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py
> index 2076a5a2d060..0b461663e7d9 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py
> +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py
> @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ def get_outfile_path(build_dir) -> str:
> class LinuxSourceTree(object):
> """Represents a Linux kernel source tree with KUnit tests."""
>
> - def __init__(self, build_dir: str, load_config=True, defconfig=DEFAULT_KUNITCONFIG_PATH) -> None:
> + def __init__(self, build_dir: str, load_config=True, kunitconfig_path='') -> None:
> signal.signal(signal.SIGINT, self.signal_handler)
>
> self._ops = LinuxSourceTreeOperations()
> @@ -131,9 +131,13 @@ class LinuxSourceTree(object):
> if not load_config:
> return
>
> - kunitconfig_path = get_kunitconfig_path(build_dir)
> - if not os.path.exists(kunitconfig_path):
> - shutil.copyfile(defconfig, kunitconfig_path)
> + if kunitconfig_path:
> + if not os.path.exists(kunitconfig_path):
> + raise ConfigError(f'Specified kunitconfig ({kunitconfig_path}) does not exist')
> + else:
> + kunitconfig_path = get_kunitconfig_path(build_dir)
> + if not os.path.exists(kunitconfig_path):
> + shutil.copyfile(DEFAULT_KUNITCONFIG_PATH, kunitconfig_path)
>
> self._kconfig = kunit_config.Kconfig()
> self._kconfig.read_from_file(kunitconfig_path)
> diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> index b593f4448e83..533fe41b5123 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ from unittest import mock
> import tempfile, shutil # Handling test_tmpdir
>
> import json
> +import signal
> import os
>
> import kunit_config
> @@ -250,6 +251,23 @@ class KUnitParserTest(unittest.TestCase):
> result.status)
> self.assertEqual('kunit-resource-test', result.suites[0].name)
>
> +class LinuxSourceTreeTest(unittest.TestCase):
> +
> + def setUp(self):
> + mock.patch.object(signal, 'signal').start()
> + self.addCleanup(mock.patch.stopall)
> +
> + def test_invalid_kunitconfig(self):
> + with self.assertRaisesRegex(kunit_kernel.ConfigError, 'nonexistent.* does not exist'):
> + kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', kunitconfig_path='/nonexistent_file')
> +
> + def test_valid_kunitconfig(self):
> + with tempfile.NamedTemporaryFile('wt') as kunitconfig:
> + tree = kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', kunitconfig_path=kunitconfig.name)
> +
> + # TODO: add more test cases.
> +
> +
> class KUnitJsonTest(unittest.TestCase):
>
> def _json_for(self, log_file):
> @@ -399,5 +417,12 @@ class KUnitMainTest(unittest.TestCase):
> self.linux_source_mock.run_kernel.assert_called_once_with(build_dir=build_dir, timeout=300)
> self.print_mock.assert_any_call(StrContains('Testing complete.'))
>
> + @mock.patch.object(kunit_kernel, 'LinuxSourceTree')
> + def test_run_kunitconfig(self, mock_linux_init):
> + mock_linux_init.return_value = self.linux_source_mock
> + kunit.main(['run', 'mykunitconfig'])
> + # Just verify that we parsed and initialized it correctly here.
> + mock_linux_init.assert_called_once_with('.kunit', kunitconfig_path='mykunitconfig')
> +
> if __name__ == '__main__':
> unittest.main()
>
> base-commit: 2b8fdbbf1c616300312f71fe5b21fe8f03129950
> --
> 2.30.0.280.ga3ce27912f-goog
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists